429's not a leftist. But please, continue. I've invented an engine that runs purely on confirmation bias and you're providing enough fuel to power New York City for a whole month.

Are you seriously going to deny the fact that they are, indeed, going after a LOT of firearms?

It's a lot of post conflict firefighting that won't amount to much, at all.

Seriously, folks said that after the Aurora shooting. Nothing happened. Nothing ever does.

And when was the last time it was at this pitch? No thanks. I'd rather let them know quite well how unpopular this actually is rather than sit on the sidelines because those on the left want to attempt to downplay it so their opposition is sitting around like dumbasses.
Way too many are taking actions that are decidedly unconstitutional, and they need to be shouted down and told to go home.

If gun rights advocates are seriously about Constitutionality, they need to start shouting down DOMA and gay marriage bans. Then we'll know they're serious. Oftentimes it seems they're selective about what parts of the Constitution they want enforced. Can't have that.

Show me in the constitution where it blatantly states that marriage is as you want it. Period. No waffling, no dancing around the issue.
THAT is the issue you're attempting to dance around.

429's not a leftist. But please, continue. I've invented an engine that runs purely on confirmation bias and you're providing enough fuel to power New York City for a whole month.

Are you seriously going to deny the fact that they are, indeed, going after a LOT of firearms?

It's a lot of post conflict firefighting that won't amount to much, at all.

Seriously, folks said that after the Aurora shooting. Nothing happened. Nothing ever does.

And when was the last time it was at this pitch? No thanks. I'd rather let them know quite well how unpopular this actually is rather than sit on the sidelines because those on the left want to attempt to downplay it so their opposition is sitting around like dumbasses.
Way too many are taking actions that are decidedly unconstitutional, and they need to be shouted down and told to go home.

If gun rights advocates are seriously about Constitutionality, they need to start shouting down DOMA and gay marriage bans. Then we'll know they're serious. Oftentimes it seems they're selective about what parts of the Constitution they want enforced. Can't have that.

Show me in the constitution where it blatantly states that marriage is as you want it. Period. No waffling, no dancing around the issue.
THAT is the issue you're attempting to dance around.

SCOTUS ruled in Loving v. Virginia that marriage was a Constitutionally guaranteed right. So yeah, if GRAs want to be taken seriously, they'd better stop with their selective enforcement bullshit that only benefits them.

It's a lot of post conflict firefighting that won't amount to much, at all.

Seriously, folks said that after the Aurora shooting. Nothing happened. Nothing ever does.

And when was the last time it was at this pitch? No thanks. I'd rather let them know quite well how unpopular this actually is rather than sit on the sidelines because those on the left want to attempt to downplay it so their opposition is sitting around like dumbasses.
Way too many are taking actions that are decidedly unconstitutional, and they need to be shouted down and told to go home.

If gun rights advocates are seriously about Constitutionality, they need to start shouting down DOMA and gay marriage bans. Then we'll know they're serious. Oftentimes it seems they're selective about what parts of the Constitution they want enforced. Can't have that.

Show me in the constitution where it blatantly states that marriage is as you want it. Period. No waffling, no dancing around the issue.
THAT is the issue you're attempting to dance around.

SCOTUS ruled in Loving v. Virginia that marriage was a Constitutionally guaranteed right. So yeah, if GRAs want to be taken seriously, they'd better stop with their selective enforcement bullshit that only benefits them.

I personally don't give two shits about the issue. But a court decision is NOT IN the constitution, to my knowledge, which is what I asked for.

For the sake of a few dozen people a year - god rest their souls - you will unwittingly call for the death of millions. This kind of legislative activity is irresponsible, and the violence that follows is a far cry from peace.

For the sake of c. 8,000 American citizens a year - god rest their souls - we call for gun-throbbers to moderate their dangerous-hobby-too-close-to-the neighbours.

And I ask that people learn how to ******** drive properly. God rest the souls that die each year, because some a*****e doesn't understand that you're supposed to look where you're going, when you drive.

But I don't see any major outcry to ban, or "tighten restrictions on" motor vehicles and their licensing.

Quote:

Every year, "self-defender" toys contribute 69% to America's murder rate.
And that murder rate is 3 times the murder rate in the rest of the 25 top developed nations in the world.

You're related to Grungekitty, aren't you?

ZOMG! 3 TIMES THE MURDERS!! 3 TIMES THE MURDERS!

Yes, 69% of murders happen with a gun. And? I wonder if you know any statistics on how many attacks were NEUTRALIZED by a gun.

Quote:

Your assumption / call to arms for gun-throbbers to shoot at the law officers of a democratic state makes a nonsense of any pretence that you're motivated by respect for the US Constitution.

Who said anything about shooting cops?

Quote:

A murdered person cannot hold down a job, their mortgage is foreclosed, their right to vote is revoked (except in Florida) and they are nailed into a coffin - surely a fairly significant loss of 'freedoms' ???

And your pissy little appeal to emotion is noted, and disregarded. Have a nice day. Tell Kitty I said hi.

429's not a leftist. But please, continue. I've invented an engine that runs purely on confirmation bias and you're providing enough fuel to power New York City for a whole month.

Are you seriously going to deny the fact that they are, indeed, going after a LOT of firearms?

It's a lot of post conflict firefighting that won't amount to much, at all.

Seriously, folks said that after the Aurora shooting. Nothing happened. Nothing ever does.

I'd be inclined to agree with you, except an assault weapons ban has happened before.

And now we're talking about banning "semi-automatics", something people still have no idea about; I guess you could go on an advertisement campaign to keep "self loading" weapons, but when you're down to that people just don't care.

These people are afraid, and irrational, and their ignorance drives their fear, their simple lack of understanding of the situation wants to make them attack it even more; God forbid they actually spent two seconds to do research to figure out what it is, even though they have google and the infinite knowledge of wikipedia.

Never underestimate what people might do when they're afraid.

Or the way simple wording might make them jump to conclusions because they want it to be true, and they want it to be that easy.

"Assault weapon", as compared to the primary self defense weapon, as compared to less than 1% of crime, as compared to the majority of weapons in the U.S., and yet it catches on. Pure and simple bullshit people WANT to believe. They're putting politics and deliberate misinformation into a goal, and bullshit legislation has been passed more than once. Our loss just so they can shove 500 new corporate loopholes onto a bill without anyone really caring what's on that bill. They're not exactly intelligent, but it's worked for them so far.

429's not a leftist. But please, continue. I've invented an engine that runs purely on confirmation bias and you're providing enough fuel to power New York City for a whole month.

Are you seriously going to deny the fact that they are, indeed, going after a LOT of firearms?

It's a lot of post conflict firefighting that won't amount to much, at all.

Seriously, folks said that after the Aurora shooting. Nothing happened. Nothing ever does.

And when was the last time it was at this pitch? No thanks. I'd rather let them know quite well how unpopular this actually is rather than sit on the sidelines because those on the left want to attempt to downplay it so their opposition is sitting around like dumbasses.
Way too many are taking actions that are decidedly unconstitutional, and they need to be shouted down and told to go home.

If gun rights advocates are seriously about Constitutionality, they need to start shouting down DOMA and gay marriage bans. Then we'll know they're serious. Oftentimes it seems they're selective about what parts of the Constitution they want enforced. Can't have that.

Also, cars are regulated more then guns are. If anything, they're an example to use in favor of heavy gun control. The statement "but I don't see any major outcry" can also be interpreted both ways. The solution may in fact be more regulation.

It's a lot of post conflict firefighting that won't amount to much, at all.

Seriously, folks said that after the Aurora shooting. Nothing happened. Nothing ever does.

And when was the last time it was at this pitch? No thanks. I'd rather let them know quite well how unpopular this actually is rather than sit on the sidelines because those on the left want to attempt to downplay it so their opposition is sitting around like dumbasses.
Way too many are taking actions that are decidedly unconstitutional, and they need to be shouted down and told to go home.

If gun rights advocates are seriously about Constitutionality, they need to start shouting down DOMA and gay marriage bans. Then we'll know they're serious. Oftentimes it seems they're selective about what parts of the Constitution they want enforced. Can't have that.

Show me in the constitution where it blatantly states that marriage is as you want it. Period. No waffling, no dancing around the issue.
THAT is the issue you're attempting to dance around.

SCOTUS ruled in Loving v. Virginia that marriage was a Constitutionally guaranteed right. So yeah, if GRAs want to be taken seriously, they'd better stop with their selective enforcement bullshit that only benefits them.

I personally don't give two shits about the issue. But a court decision is NOT IN the constitution, to my knowledge, which is what I asked for.

You must have missed the part in your high school civics class where they outlined how Supreme Court rulings establish precedent for future rulings. Ergo, until Loving v. Virginia is overturned, which it will not be, marriage as a Constitutional right is the law of the land.

And it really does say a lot that you don't care about the issue. You care about YOUR rights, but ******** the chumps who aren't you. That's bullshit.

429's not a leftist. But please, continue. I've invented an engine that runs purely on confirmation bias and you're providing enough fuel to power New York City for a whole month.

Are you seriously going to deny the fact that they are, indeed, going after a LOT of firearms?

It's a lot of post conflict firefighting that won't amount to much, at all.

Seriously, folks said that after the Aurora shooting. Nothing happened. Nothing ever does.

And when was the last time it was at this pitch? No thanks. I'd rather let them know quite well how unpopular this actually is rather than sit on the sidelines because those on the left want to attempt to downplay it so their opposition is sitting around like dumbasses.
Way too many are taking actions that are decidedly unconstitutional, and they need to be shouted down and told to go home.

If gun rights advocates are seriously about Constitutionality, they need to start shouting down DOMA and gay marriage bans. Then we'll know they're serious. Oftentimes it seems they're selective about what parts of the Constitution they want enforced. Can't have that.

where does the constitution mention gay marriage?

As I told Joe, Loving v. Virginia, which ruled anti-miscegination laws illegal, stated in the ruling that marriage was a Constitutionally protected right. The Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution is law.

For the sake of a few dozen people a year - god rest their souls - you will unwittingly call for the death of millions. This kind of legislative activity is irresponsible, and the violence that follows is a far cry from peace.

For the sake of c. 8,000 American citizens a year - god rest their souls - we call for gun-throbbers to moderate their dangerous-hobby-too-close-to-the neighbours.

Every year, "self-defender" toys contribute 69% to America's murder rate.
And that murder rate is 3 times the murder rate in the rest of the 25 top developed nations in the world.

Your assumption / call to arms for gun-throbbers to shoot at the law officers of a democratic state makes a nonsense of any pretence that you're motivated by respect for the US Constitution.

A murdered person cannot hold down a job, their mortgage is foreclosed, their right to vote is revoked (except in Florida) and they are nailed into a coffin - surely a fairly significant loss of 'freedoms' ???

Make ya a deal, cupcake; hire me round the clock private security protection, and I'll happily turn in every firearm I own (only 3 at this point, but you get the point).

Becuase guess what? Police and the military are not required to protect ANYONE except, ironically, prison inmates.

So I'm on my own, and you're wanting to further diminish means of self defense. I think I'm quite right in asking for something to refill the void.